Hypoxic training for Masters?

I My own view is, why take a chance on training in a way UNLIKE the way I plan to race? And sometimes I'll take more underwater kicks than I plan to do in a race because, let's face it, one can rarely swim as hard in practice as in a race. Seriously... this guy knows what he is talking about! Posting this simply because I know - masters swimmers need to hear it more than once!

But swimming freestyle breathing every 7 strokes doesn't help underwater SDKs. When most people talk about "hypoxic" they are talking about breath control swimming. And I suggest that the data shows it has little or no benefit. No one swims as fast breathing every 7 as they do breathing every 2 or 3 strokes. Maglischo says we would benefit more overall swimming faster breathing as needed. Agreed. The only times I do this kind of set is if I want to work on stroke efficiency (ie DPS) or mechanics, or work on alternate breathing, or if I want to limit how fast I can go (ie recovery). Which I guess is Maglischo's point. Personally I think the term "hypoxic" should be expanded to include underwater work and work with snorkels (especially when the intake is partially blocked).

Chris, your workout swims are pretty dang impressive along with your ability to take 5 or 6 SDKs off each wall on long hard sets. I wuss out too often, need to do a better job at keeping a kick count going in fast 100's & 200's, don't think I've ever made a hard 200 with 6 SDKs off each wall in practice or a meet. Austin Staab says he takes 7 off every wall in practice, no matter the set. Seems to me some swimmers are SDKing further, breathing less, & going faster times. I agree if you want to do something in a meet you need to do it in practice so often that it's a habit. Ande I think what Maglischo was saying was that you can build more lactate by swimming faster, and that generally requires more oxygen. That you do not build as much lactate in hypoxic sets, and so hypoxic sets are not a good way to build up lactate tolerance. But that seems like a pretty dated statement to me. Anyone who thinks that hard underwater kicking doesn't generate as much lactate as surface swimming isn't doing it right, IMO... Of course SDK is about hydrodynamics. And the longer you can stay under (up to 15m), the faster you can go in the race...if you can control your oxygen debt. Hence the hypoxic part. What you and other hypoxic nay-sayings are basically saying is that doing such work in practice doesn't prepare you for race conditions except psychologically (which isn't a small thing, btw). My own view is, why take a chance on training in a way UNLIKE the way I plan to race? And sometimes I'll take more underwater kicks than I plan to do in a race because, let's face it, one can rarely swim as hard in practice as in a race.

Chris - I completely agree that we should all train (at least sometimes) like we want to race. That includes doing SDKS. But swimming freestyle breathing every 7 strokes doesn't help underwater SDKs. When most people talk about "hypoxic" they are talking about breath control swimming. And I suggest that the data shows it has little or no benefit. No one swims as fast breathing every 7 as they do breathing every 2 or 3 strokes. Maglischo says we would benefit more overall swimming faster breathing as needed. That is different than sprinting - more like racing. I'm talking about hypoxic sets, like those coaches have assigned for years - 10x100 breathing 3-5-7 etc.

Personally I think the term "hypoxic" should be expanded to include underwater work and work with snorkels (especially when the intake is partially blocked). I have thought this way for years. I have also never been an advocate of (and refuse to do) breathing 3-5-7-9 stuff. Instead (on short/speed stuff) I will focus on taking no more than 1-2 breaths per length max (if at all) and on pull sets rarely do them without a snorkel that is fitted with a restrictor cap.

A few random thoughts here: lung capacity per se is a relatively trivial element in aerobic performance. there have been one-lunged Olympians (not sure which sports) who have reportedly performed well. the ability of the skeletal muscles to extract oxygen from the blood, and the ability of the blood and circulatory system to pick up oxygen and carry it to these muscles, then pick up CO2 and carry this back to the lungs--these are much more critical factors. training is very muscle specific, and one of the adaptations aerobically trained muscles undergo is the ability to uptake more oxygen and nutrients from the blood stream than untrained muscles. one-legged bicycle training trials have shown that the same person can have a great VO2 max in the trained leg--and a mediocre one in the untrained leg based on my recent familiarizing with the hypoxic training literature (sleep high, train low), the benefits of this are debatable at best. There may be a small benefit to sea level performance, but a lot of researchers now think that sleeping at altitude (real or simulated) probably does little to enhance sea level performance, but it may help pre-acclimate you to high altitude performance. You may wonder, what about natural blood doping? It's true that bivouacing at altitude does increase your blood's oxygen carrying capacity, but it also makes your blood a little sludgier (more RBCs per unit volume). Some researchers now believe that these two effects essentially cancel each other out, resulting in no appreciable benefit. In any event, there seems to be no "simulated" altitude training effect from hypoxic sets because such don't last long enough to triggrer any significant blood changes. swimming, like many sports, has no shortage of "everybody knows" conventional wisdom training truisms that may, in fact, be false. Hypoxic sets may, in fact, fall into that area where coaching and hazing rituals intersect. the "need" to breathe is driven by a build up of CO2, not a decrease in Oxygen. As I once posted elsewhere, I help my breath for nearly two minutes out in Boulder with a pulse oximeter on my finger. It was exquisitely painful, but my blood oxygen saturation level did not get down below 94 percent. Later that day, atop Pikes Peak and breathing ad libertam, I felt absolutely fine--even though my ox sat now was 91 percent. The build up of CO2, not a defiicit of OX, is what hurts and tells our diaphrams to breathe! i like hypoxic sets myself, primarily because I am pretty good at them. i find them relaxing. however, when i was our team's player coach and would write the workouts, I always prefaced any hypoxic set with a warning: if you see what appears to be a swarm of black dots closing fast across your visual field, you probably need to breathe. And quickly. one other possible benefit, if there is one, to hypoxic training is the psychological effect--you adapt yourself to this form of discomfort so that when you encounter it in a race, it doesn't freak you out. Who among us hasn't had an overwhelming urge to sneak a breath on a final stroke on a 100? If we have taught ourselves we can safely ignore this impulse, maybe we can shave a couple hundredths off our time? And with SDKs, mental habituation to hypoxic discomforts os no doubt even more important. all this, of course, is moot now. our Y has posted all these sheets in the pool area, printed on orange paper, proscribing any breath restriction whatsover! the days of whine and hazes, it would appear, are kaput at the Sewickley YMCA.

I agree with Chris and Jim.Swim like you race or an exaggeration of your race.For instance in BR if you don't do a good pullout every time you certainly won't the last 1-3 turns of a 200.Lately with the extra distance from tech suits and the dolphin kick rule I have been trying to acclimate by doing some double pullout sets(2underwater pullouts before breakout).The only value I see in the 3-5-7 sets is to make you think.

We do hypoxic (3-5-7-9) sometimes in Masters practice. At speed I don't like it as I think it makes me rush my strokes to get air more quickly. At slow speed it can help to concentrate on smoothing out the stroke (probably a sign that my breathing action is inefficient).

Agreed. The only times I do this kind of set is if I want to work on stroke efficiency (ie DPS) or mechanics, or work on alternate breathing, or if I want to limit how fast I can go (ie recovery). Which I guess is Maglischo's point. Personally I think the term "hypoxic" should be expanded to include underwater work and work with snorkels (especially when the intake is partially blocked). I think a new term should be create instead of adding yet another level of confusion to "hypoxic." I don't have a suggestion just yet - but when they do - they should notify the coaching associations, and send an email to all interested parties. Then the stupid age group coaches could start teaching their kids the right terms and methods.

If a coach says: "We're gonna do some SDK work" - I think that is very clear (although age groupers do not know what SDK is). Coaches could make this stick. "We're gonna do some hypoxic" - I think most Masters swimmers think that means stuff like 3-5-7. My two swimmer sons (16 and 19) have heard their 3-5-7 sets called "breath control" sets, not hypoxic. Their coach is close to my age though and I bet she learned it as hypoxic.